There are serious errors in your form submission, please see below for details.

Search RTI Appeal

List of RTI Appeal

SNo. Registration No Appellate Authority Name Received date Reply Appeal Reply Doc
1231 CICOM/A/E/23/00131 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 14-04-2023 Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/23/00323 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that “As totally incomplete information is provided as all the questions were not answered,, thus the present appeal before FAA As per Section - 6 of the RTI Act, 2005 read with Rule 3 of the RTI rules, 2012 this is to hereby ask the Central Information Commission (CIC) that: - Q.1) As per Section - 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005 what is the decision made on the appeal bearing the Diary No. 656816 dated 25.10.2022? Q.2) As per Section - 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005 what is the decision made on the appeal bearing the Diary No. 654337 and file No. CIC.MCDND.A.2022.654337? Q.3) As per Section - 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005 what is the decision made on the appeal bearing the Diary No. 655763 and file No. CIC.IDBIL.A.2022.655763 dated 17.10.2022? Q.4) As per Section - 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005 what is the decision made on the appeal bearing the Diary No. 655753 and file No. CIC.NINC.A.2022.655753 dated 17.10.2022? Q.5) As per Section - 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005 what is the time duration in which an Appeal filed with the CIC against the Order of the FAA have to be heard and adjudicated by the CIC? Q.6) As per Section - 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005 kindly provide a response of the Email being sent to the CIC as on 08.12.2022 from the Email ID of Advocaterishabhj(at)gmail.com. Q.7) As per Section - 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005 Kindly provide any other related information. In case query relates to some other public authority please transfer this RTI application there under Section 6 (3) of the RTI Act, 2005 under intimation to me. That as per the order of the Honourable Delhi High Court in Har Kishan v. President Secretariat and Anr. W.P. (C) 7976 of 2020 dated 29.01.2021, the above mentioned Information sought is of Personal nature as the present RTI Applicant is himself an Advocate cum Applicant for the present Applications and also the Information sought is considered to be of utmost public importance.” DECISION OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal and the RTI application have been perused. For Point No. 1 & 2 CPIO (DR to IC-UM) is directed to reply to the RTI application for point no. 1 and 2 as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 by 19.05.2023, free of cost. For Point No. 3 to 7 As per Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005 only such information as is available and existing and held by the public authority or is under control of the public authority can be provided by a PIO. The PIO is not supposed to create or collate information that is not a part of the record. Accordingly, the reply given by the CPIO is appropriate and as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. NA
1232 CICOM/A/P/23/00065 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 12-04-2023 आर. टी. आई. आवेदन, प्रदान की गई सूचना एवं प्रथम अपील का अवलोकन करने पर पाया गया कि अपीलकर्ता के आर.टी.आई. आवेदन सं. CICOM/R/P/23/00072 में सूचना मांगी थी जिसके प्रतिउत्तर में केंद्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी द्वारा प्रेषित की गई सूचना, सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम के प्रावधानों एवं मांगी गई सूचना के अनुसार ही है। अतः केंद्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी द्वारा प्रदान की गई सूचना तथ्यात्मक है और इसमें प्रथम अपीलीय अधिकारी के हस्तक्षेप की कोई आवश्यकता नहीं है। NA
1233 CICOM/A/P/23/00064 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 11-04-2023 आर.टी.आई. आवेदन एवं प्रथम अपील का अवलोकन करने पर पाया गया कि अपीलकर्ता के आर.टी. आई. आवेदन सं CICOM/R/P/23/00134 के प्रतिउत्तर में कोई भी सूचना प्रदान नहीं की गई है। अतः केंद्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी को यह निर्देश दिए जाता है कि वह अपीलकर्ता को आर.टी.आई. आवेदन सं. CICOM/R/P/23/00134 तहत मांगी गई सूचना दिनांक 24.04.2023 तक अपीलकर्ता को (फ्री ऑफ कॉस्ट) ऑफलाइन प्रेषित की जाये। NA
1234 CICOM/A/E/23/00128 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 11-04-2023 Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/23/00211 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that TILL DATE NO REPLY RECEIVED FROM PIO PRAYER: - Direct the PIO to provide prointwise complete and correct information free of cost witin 1 week Enclosures: - Page 1 - RTI application Page 2 - Online status of RTI application as on 11 April 2023 DECISION OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal and the RTI application have been perused. CPIO (DR to IC-UM) is directed to reply to the RTI application as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 by 10.05.2023, free of cost. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. NA
1235 CICOM/A/E/23/00129 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 11-04-2023 Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/23/00179 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that FIRST APPEAL UNDER SECTION 19 (1) OF THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT-2005 1. To, The First Appellate Authority, Hon. Central information Commission, New Delhi 110067. 2. Name and address of the CPIO against the decision of whom an appeal is preferred The CPIO, Hon. Central information Commission, New Delhi 110067. 3. RTI application number CICOM/R/E/23/00179 dated 01.03.2023 4. REASON/CAUSE FOR APPEAL – I had requested the below information 1. SPECIFIC INFORMATION BEING SOUGHT 1. Supply me certified copy of information of provision of RTI act 2005 as per which Commission, after perusal of case records and submissions made during hearing, observes that an appropriate response as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 has been provided by the Respondent when actually CPIO not supplied requested information point no.2 day to update, office note, comments, action taken on application dated 07.09.2021 and reminder 06.10.2021 and point no. 1. 2. Supply me certified copy of information of provision of RTI act 2005 as per which Commission directs the concerned PIO to furnish a copy of their written submission along with annexures, dated 20.02.2023, to the Appellant, free of cost via speed-post and via e-mail, within 07 days from the date of receipt of this order and accordingly, compliance report be sent to the Commission, after disposal of appeal. 2. No reply till today after completion of 30 days. 5. PRAYER FOR RELIEF SOUGHT SUSTAINING RULES UNDER THE RTI Act-2005 1. To direct the CPIO, to supply me the information being sought by me immediately free of cost. 2. To impose any of the penalties on the CPIO provided under this act. (Refer to Section 19,(8), ( C ) read with Section 20, (1) of the RTI Act-2005 for delay in supplying information for 30 days. 3. To take disciplinary action on the CPIO provided under this act as he mala-fidely denied my request. (Refer to Section 20, (1) and (2) of the RTI Act-2005. DECISION OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal and the RTI application have been perused. CPIO (DR to IC-UM) is directed to reply to the RTI application as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 by 10.05.2023, free of cost. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. NA
1236 CICOM/A/E/23/00125 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 10-04-2023 Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/23/00301 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that “CIC must disclose a COMPUTER PRINTOUT that shows the date on which the SECOND APPEAL was received. That will be the PROOF that I submitted the 2nd Appeal to the CIC along with the RTI Application, CPIO absence, First Appeal, First Appeal Authority absence, and the 2ND APPEAL along with the SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS and PROOF OF ID. CPIO has merely given me the OPINION. How can the CIC CPIO behave this way? RTI Application is for DOCUMENTS and not just the OPINION of the CPIO. CPIO must be directed to disclose the COMPUTER PRINTOUT which proves that I submitted the 2nd Appeal and with other documents. CIC Mr Y K Sinha has lied in the Order that I did not communicate to him my CONTENTIONS in writing. How can a SECOND APPEAL HEARING be conducted if I failed to communicate my 2ND APPEAL to the CIC in writing? This is most absurd. Thus, the CPIO must be directed by the FIRST APPEAL AUTHORITY to disclose the COMPUTER PRINTOUT that proves that I submitted all documents required for the 2nd appeal.” DECISION OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. As per Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005 only such information as is available and existing and held by the public authority or is under control of the public authority can be provided by a PIO. The PIO is not supposed to create or collate information that is not a part of the record. Accordingly, the reply given by the CPIO is appropriate and as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. NA
1237 CICOM/A/P/23/00063 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 10-04-2023 Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/P/22/00666 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that “I am to invite your kind attention towards the RTI application dated 08.12.2022 submitted to PIO CIC New Delhi and to say that the requisite information furnished by the CPIO is misleading and incorrect.” DECISION OF FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. As per Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005 only such information as is available and existing and held by the public authority or is under control of the public authority can be provided by a PIO. The PIO is not supposed to create or collate information that is not a part of the record. Accordingly, the reply given by the CPIO is appropriate and as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. NA
1238 CICOM/A/E/23/00124 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 10-04-2023 Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/23/00236 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that “ACCORDING TO RTI ACT, THE APPLICATION IS MOVED TO THE CONCERNED DEPARTMENT, PLEASE MOVE THE APPLICATION TO THE CONCERNED OFFICE .” DECISION OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. As per Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005 only such information as is available and existing and held by the public authority or is under control of the public authority can be provided by a PIO. The PIO is not supposed to create or collate information that is not a part of the record. As per the Section 6(1) of the RTI Act, 2005, the applicant shall file information request with the concerned Public Authority which holds the information. Accordingly, the reply given by the CPIO is appropriate and as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. NA
1239 CICOM/A/E/23/00123 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 10-04-2023 ऑनलाइन आर. टी. आई. आवेदन, प्रदान की गई सूचना एवं प्रथम अपील का अवलोकन करने पर पाया गया कि अपीलकर्ता के आर.टी.आई. आवेदन सं. CICOM/R/E/23/00232 में सूचना मांगी थी जिसके प्रतिउत्तर में केंद्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी द्वारा प्रेषित की गई सूचना, सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम के प्रावधानों एवं मांगी गई सूचना के अनुसार ही है। अतः सूचना के अधिकार अधिनियम की धारा 2 (च) के प्रावधानों के अनुसार एक जन सूचना अधिकारी केवल सम्बंधित लोक प्राधिकरण के रिकॉर्ड में एक सामग्री के रूप में उपलब्ध सूचना ही प्रदान कर सकता है। अतः केंद्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी द्वारा प्रदान की गई सूचना तथ्यात्मक है और इसमें प्रथम अपीलीय अधिकारी के हस्तक्षेप की कोई आवश्यकता नहीं है। NA
1240 CICOM/A/E/23/00127 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 10-04-2023 Ref RTI No.-CICOM/R/T/23/00035/1 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that “On 12/03/23, I made request to DOPT for (1) information of officers and employees provided by Central Government u/s 13(6) of the RTI Act at 3 points of time with different sanctioned strengths and at present and (2) particulars of DOPT files in which CIC recruitment rules were processed. On 29/03/23 DOPT made transfer No. CICOM/R/T/23/00035 to CIC that was forwarded to Consultant (Admin) & CPIO who transferred back to RTI Cell as No. CICOM/R/T/23/00035/1. On 06/04/23 No. CICOM/R/T/23/00035/1 was disposed of saying it was mistaken and No. CICOM/R/T/23/00035/2 was transferred back to DOPT as No. DOP&T/R/T/23/01507 that has been disposed of on 10/04/23 with online Reply saying for point (1): Since the officers are provided from different Divisions of this Department therefore not available as in desired format. However, the application was also transferred to CIC for providing the available information. GROUNDS: It appears that DOPT / IR Division does not maintain consolidated information of officers and employees provided u/s 13(6) of the RTI Act and that was the reason (not disclosed in transfer form) for the transfer to CIC. REQUEST: Please direct the concerned CPIO to provide (or any CPIO to take assistance u/s 5(4) of the concerned CIC officer and provide) the information that DOPT CPIO is unable to provide for request point (1).” DECISION OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. As per Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005 only such information as is available and existing and held by the public authority or is under control of the public authority can be provided by a PIO. The PIO is not supposed to create or collate information that is not a part of the record. Accordingly, the reply given by the CPIO is appropriate and as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. NA